UFC 158 - GSP v. Diaz & Condit v. McDonald 2 - Montreal - March 16

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • ex carrabba fan
    I'll thank him for you
    • Oct 2004
    • 32744

    #76
    Re: UFC 158 - GSP v. Diaz & Condit v. McDonald 2 - Montreal - March 16

    Judging is very very tricky, so I understand that it's not an easy fix.

    However judging a fight as a whole sounds a tad bit more appealing than round by round.

    Especially since a 10-9 round can vary so much to other 10-9 rounds. This is the biggest reason, IMO, why round by round scoring is too flawed in nature. I point to the Edgar/Aldo fight for an example of what I'm talking about. People were making a case for Edgar but IMO there was no way that Edgar could be considered the winner of that fight, if you look at it as a whole. But according to the rules in place, the case could actually be made for Edgar. Round by round, you could make a case that Edgar won.

    Comment

    • ManiacMatt1782
      Who? Giroux!
      • Jul 2006
      • 3982

      #77
      Re: UFC 158 - GSP v. Diaz & Condit v. McDonald 2 - Montreal - March 16

      Originally posted by allBthere
      I agree with you and I'm a big GSP fan as well (or at least acknowledge you're not attacking him regarding this issue). I think GSP tries to finish fights and sometimes too hard winging punches like via shields but it's a fine line. Edgar vs Penn was a standing point match, and there have been MANY wrestlers who simply neutralize the opponent but meanwhile do absolute zero in the fight. A couple of Bader fights come to mind when he was newer. Guida has had a couple of fights where he is a "blanket" ...

      The knee-jerk reaction often is "well every fight can't be a slug-fest" and make it seem like people complaining about too much 'neutralizing' simply don't know MMA which is total BS. Almost everyone would agree takedowns are weighed much too heavily even when absolutely nothing is done with it. Most wrestling takedowns on their own do minimal to no damage.

      So a change in scoring could actually curtail that strategy a bit. It's a reason I would like to see legalized up-kicks to a grounded opponent and I've said that many times as well as the whole putting your hand on the mat while in a position to be kneed solely to make it illegal for your opponent to knee you ie, manipulating the rules in a way to your benefit even though this was not the way they were intended to affect bouts. In the first case though, if you're taking me down and I'm down and you're smothering me and I create some separation - why in the hell can't I kick you in the face and try to knock you unconscious? Because we're on the ground? And that matters because? YOu brought me there, and I should be able to take advantage of any separation I can cause, especially to stop you from 'neutralizing' .

      So that's my tangent!

      But in the end, show me when GSP stops working in a fight and just holds someone down - he's usually trying to strike or work a sub. He's in a tough spot though for some fans because he simply lacks that firepower to KO someone for the most part - but what he does do almost 100% of the time is beat his opponent to a pulp where they feel it for weeks afterwards and dominates them the whole way.

      In the end if GSP is able to beat Nick and finish him, I still see Nick not giving him any respect and making some crazy babble rant about how it was BS.
      Most lay and pray is the fault of the bottom fighter only willing to tie up and nuetalize gnp. And making no effort to sweep, or submit the top fighter, or creating a scramble to get the fight standing. I concede the top fighter sometimes plays it too cautios. But most times it his the bottom fighter stalling and praying for the ref to stand them back up, and not taking initiative to make that happen on their own.
      www.twitch.tv/maniacmatt1228
      www.youtube.com/maniacmatt1782

      Comment

      • ManiacMatt1782
        Who? Giroux!
        • Jul 2006
        • 3982

        #78
        Re: UFC 158 - GSP v. Diaz & Condit v. McDonald 2 - Montreal - March 16

        Originally posted by ex carrabba fan
        Judging is very very tricky, so I understand that it's not an easy fix.

        However judging a fight as a whole sounds a tad bit more appealing than round by round.

        Especially since a 10-9 round can vary so much to other 10-9 rounds. This is the biggest reason, IMO, why round by round scoring is too flawed in nature. I point to the Edgar/Aldo fight for an example of what I'm talking about. People were making a case for Edgar but IMO there was no way that Edgar could be considered the winner of that fight, if you look at it as a whole. But according to the rules in place, the case could actually be made for Edgar. Round by round, you could make a case that Edgar won.
        I have always said this. Why are there 10 poinys if only 3 are ever used? Todays 10-8 should be a 10-3 or 10-2. Then judge the closer rounds on a sliding scale.
        www.twitch.tv/maniacmatt1228
        www.youtube.com/maniacmatt1782

        Comment

        • aholbert32
          (aka Alberto)
          • Jul 2002
          • 33106

          #79
          Re: UFC 158 - GSP v. Diaz & Condit v. McDonald 2 - Montreal - March 16

          Originally posted by ManiacMatt1782
          I have always said this. Why are there 10 poinys if only 3 are ever used? Todays 10-8 should be a 10-3 or 10-2. Then judge the closer rounds on a sliding scale.
          Its because the unified rules are based of of boxing and it makes it easier for state commissions to understand judging. Also I think the sliding scale is a bad idea. Judges dont even know the difference between a 10-9 and 10-8 round in MMA. You think these same judges would be able to determine the difference between a 10-7 and 10-4 round?

          Comment

          • p_rushing
            Hall Of Fame
            • Feb 2004
            • 14514

            #80
            Re: UFC 158 - GSP v. Diaz & Condit v. McDonald 2 - Montreal - March 16

            Originally posted by aholbert32
            Its because the unified rules are based of of boxing and it makes it easier for state commissions to understand judging. Also I think the sliding scale is a bad idea. Judges dont even know the difference between a 10-9 and 10-8 round in MMA. You think these same judges would be able to determine the difference between a 10-7 and 10-4 round?
            Yeah that is definitely a bad idea.

            The UFC needs to work with the State commissions and get people that are in/know MMA to be licensed and selected for those fights.

            Comment

            • aholbert32
              (aka Alberto)
              • Jul 2002
              • 33106

              #81
              Re: UFC 158 - GSP v. Diaz & Condit v. McDonald 2 - Montreal - March 16

              Originally posted by p_rushing
              Yeah that is definitely a bad idea.

              The UFC needs to work with the State commissions and get people that are in/know MMA to be licensed and selected for those fights.
              I think Dana doesnt want to be bothered with that. The UFC would have to work with 48 state commissions (49 if NY is involved). The last thing they want is to have one scoring system in one state and another in some other state.

              Comment

              • Sandman42
                Hall Of Fame
                • Aug 2004
                • 15186

                #82
                Re: UFC 158 - GSP v. Diaz & Condit v. McDonald 2 - Montreal - March 16

                There is no problem with the 10 point system. There's no fight I can think of that the system has failed to pick a correct winner.

                The problem is with the judges. Get competent judges and all the fights will be scored correctly. I still don't know why they don't at least increase the judges size to 5. They already have 6 or 7 judges per event anyway, I see no reason to have only 3 judges per fight.
                Member of The OS Baseball Rocket Scientists Association

                Comment

                • RangersCruz
                  MVP
                  • May 2012
                  • 3275

                  #83
                  Re: UFC 158 - GSP v. Diaz & Condit v. McDonald 2 - Montreal - March 16

                  Nick wins = Dana pissed off , loses money

                  I'd be good with that we get a champion that actually fights and the way Dana has been recently cutting fighters who win and being greedy he deserves it

                  Comment

                  • aholbert32
                    (aka Alberto)
                    • Jul 2002
                    • 33106

                    #84
                    Re: UFC 158 - GSP v. Diaz & Condit v. McDonald 2 - Montreal - March 16

                    Originally posted by RangersCruz
                    Nick wins = Dana pissed off , loses money

                    I'd be good with that we get a champion that actually fights and the way Dana has been recently cutting fighters who win and being greedy he deserves it
                    Dana wont lose money at all. If anything, Diaz winning convincingly creates another PPV draw for the UFC AND there is a potential for a high money rematch. GSP will always draw Canadian fans and US fans so a loss doesnt necessarily hurt his brand.

                    Comment

                    • ManiacMatt1782
                      Who? Giroux!
                      • Jul 2006
                      • 3982

                      #85
                      Re: UFC 158 - GSP v. Diaz & Condit v. McDonald 2 - Montreal - March 16

                      Originally posted by aholbert32
                      Its because the unified rules are based of of boxing and it makes it easier for state commissions to understand judging. Also I think the sliding scale is a bad idea. Judges dont even know the difference between a 10-9 and 10-8 round in MMA. You think these same judges would be able to determine the difference between a 10-7 and 10-4 round?
                      To be fair i thought it was stupid for boxing too. Why is a knockdown the cause of 10-8? If a guy out lands his opponent by 40 significant shots, and doesnt knock the guy down, he only gets a 10-9. Then the fighter that got his *** beat the round before lands a balance shot and gets a 10-8 on a punch that wasnt really significant.
                      www.twitch.tv/maniacmatt1228
                      www.youtube.com/maniacmatt1782

                      Comment

                      • aholbert32
                        (aka Alberto)
                        • Jul 2002
                        • 33106

                        #86
                        Re: UFC 158 - GSP v. Diaz & Condit v. McDonald 2 - Montreal - March 16

                        Originally posted by ManiacMatt1782
                        To be fair i thought it was stupid for boxing too. Why is a knockdown the cause of 10-8? If a guy out lands his opponent by 40 significant shots, and doesnt knock the guy down, he only gets a 10-9. Then the fighter that got his *** beat the round before lands a balance shot and gets a 10-8 on a punch that wasnt really significant.
                        In my 25 years of watching boxing, I've seen plenty of 10-8 rounds without knockdowns. If someone is completely dominating a round, I've seen judges give 10-8's in boxing.

                        Comment

                        • ex carrabba fan
                          I'll thank him for you
                          • Oct 2004
                          • 32744

                          #87
                          Re: UFC 158 - GSP v. Diaz & Condit v. McDonald 2 - Montreal - March 16

                          Originally posted by Sandman42
                          There is no problem with the 10 point system. There's no fight I can think of that the system has failed to pick a correct winner.

                          The problem is with the judges. Get competent judges and all the fights will be scored correctly. I still don't know why they don't at least increase the judges size to 5. They already have 6 or 7 judges per event anyway, I see no reason to have only 3 judges per fight.
                          Great point. I admit, I can't think of a major decision that was an injustice thanks to judges.

                          However I think overall, if you judge a fight as a whole, I think that would promote more action and less staleness. Or maybe, not, lol. Depending on how much wrestling and "controlling" [laying on] an opponent holds value to judges.

                          Do you guys feel like points per round has any correlation to how a guy looks for more action? I don't know, I am basically just looking for more action and less laying/holding guys against the cage. I loathe those moments when they do it continually. That is a huge killer for MMA IMO. The back to the cage and standing there. It's hard work yeah, but it's really hard on the eyes.

                          Comment

                          • Gotmadskillzson
                            Live your life
                            • Apr 2008
                            • 23441

                            #88
                            Re: UFC 158 - GSP v. Diaz & Condit v. McDonald 2 - Montreal - March 16

                            The only way you will see more action in the UFC and MMA in general is if they start handing out yellow cards and hitting these guys in the pocket book with fines. That is one thing I loved about Pride. If you weren't trying to engage you got hit with a fine.

                            Comment

                            • aholbert32
                              (aka Alberto)
                              • Jul 2002
                              • 33106

                              #89
                              Re: UFC 158 - GSP v. Diaz & Condit v. McDonald 2 - Montreal - March 16

                              Originally posted by ex carrabba fan
                              Great point. I admit, I can't think of a major decision that was an injustice thanks to judges.

                              However I think overall, if you judge a fight as a whole, I think that would promote more action and less staleness. Or maybe, not, lol. Depending on how much wrestling and "controlling" [laying on] an opponent holds value to judges.

                              Do you guys feel like points per round has any correlation to how a guy looks for more action? I don't know, I am basically just looking for more action and less laying/holding guys against the cage. I loathe those moments when they do it continually. That is a huge killer for MMA IMO. The back to the cage and standing there. It's hard work yeah, but it's really hard on the eyes.
                              IMO, judging has zero to do with stalling tactics like holding against the cage and lay and pray. I end to lean toward the Joe Rogan side of this argument. Joe is against ref standups or separations of any kind. He believes that the sport is called MIXED Martial Arts for a reason. If you cant use your skill to negate a wrestler and prevent a takedown or get off of your back than you dont deserve to win.

                              Take for example, the Lombard/Okami fight. In Round 1, Okami took Lombard down and instead of trying to move to get off his back or attempt a sub from his back, he just tried to wrap Okami up and get the ref to stand them up. Thankfully, that didnt work and the ref let Okami work from that position the rest of the round. If you cant get off your back or off the cage...maybe you should try out a different sport like kickboxing.

                              Also, its rare to see anyone just lay and pray anymore. The only people I can think of off hand are guys like Askren and Volkmann but even Askren is improving his ground striking. Even guys like Fitch are constantly throwing strikes from top position. The problem is Fitch doesnt have fight stopping power from that position and rarely throws elbows that result in serious damage.

                              Yellow cards could help but in the case of laying and praying or cage clinching...who gets the yellow card? Should we penalize the guy who got the takedown or dominate position? Is it his fault that he's in a dominate position and the other fighter cant get up? If a solution is needed, I think refs should be encouraged to stand up or separate fighters more often if no action (meaning no guard passes or strikes are being thrown).

                              Comment

                              • Gotmadskillzson
                                Live your life
                                • Apr 2008
                                • 23441

                                #90
                                Re: UFC 158 - GSP v. Diaz & Condit v. McDonald 2 - Montreal - March 16

                                IMO if you just leaning on or laying on a guy, he not holding you but yet you not attempting to strike you should get the yellow card.

                                If you constantly circling the cage and not trying to engage, you should get the yellow card.

                                Comment

                                Working...